Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA)

Introduction. A Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) is an evaluation to determine whether a technology is mature enough to include in a larger system. A TRA examines program concepts, technology requirements, and demonstrated technology capabilities. 

Two key terms are used in TRAs. The first is “critical technology element” (CTE). The DoD TRA Guidebook (see link at end of article) states, “A CTE is a new or novel technology on which a program or platform depends to successfully develop a system or to meet an operational threshold. A CTE may be hardware, software, or a process critical to the performance of a larger system to the fulfillment of a key objective, such as a cyber-related capability.” Appendix A of the DoD TRA Guidebook provides guidance and best practices for identifying CTEs. Section 2 of the DoD TRA Guidebook provides guidance for assessing hardware CTEs for six types of systems, plus software CTEs.

The second key TRA term is the Technology Readiness Level (TRL), a fundamental metric first developed at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the 1970s and adopted by the DoD in 2001. The TRL depicts technology maturity with criteria on a one to nine scale, with one being least mature and nine being most mature. The DoD TRA Guidebook contains TRL definitions, descriptions, and supporting information for hardware and software TRLs in Tables 2-1 and 2-2, respectively.

TRA Guidance. After adopting the TRL scale in 2001, the DoD produced a TRA Deskbook in 2003, with updates in 2007 and 2009, and a focused TRA Guidance document in 2011. The latest DoD TRA Guidebook, published in 2023, incorporates and supersedes the 2009 TRA Deskbook and 2011 TRA Guidance, plus incorporates recommendations from the January 2020 Government Accountability Office (GAO) Technology Readiness Assessment Guide – Best Practices for Evaluating the Readiness of Technology for Use in Acquisition Programs and Projects. This article provides a short overview of the TRA. For more details, see the link to the DoD TRA Guidebook at the end of this article.

Benefit of Conducting TRAs. The DoD TRA Guidebook states, “Experts agree that following an evidence-based and repeatable process that focuses on how the end user plans to employ the technology, leads to enhanced TRA outcomes for Program Managers (PMs) and leadership. TRAs help programs make decisions to safeguard technical development from undue risk. They provide PMs and program leadership with information for making decisions about whether technology is sufficiently mature and can move to the next acquisition phase or whether it needs additional maturation work or should be discontinued. The TRA report, resulting from the assessment, informs program management decisions regarding cost, schedule, and risk. 

“TRAs provide a standard framework for applying measures and methods that identify potential technical risks. The program can respond to these identified risks by preparing a Technology Maturation Plan (TMP), which outlines the steps and level of effort required to mature the identified risky (immature) technologies.” See Appendix C of the DoD TRA Guidebook for a TMP template.

TRA Applicability. For DoD, the main purpose of the TRA is to provide the Program Manager with a comprehensive assessment of technical risks associated with technologies to be incorporated into a program. According to the Adaptive Acquisition Framework Document Identification (AAFDID) Tool for Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs), the TRA supports the statutory information requirement for MDAPs that require a Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) Certification and Determination under 10 U.S.C. 4252. The TRA evaluates whether the CTEs have been demonstrated in a relevant environment, i.e., TRL-6. Technology maturity is also one of seven factors assessed in the Independent Technical Risk Assessment (ITRA) required of MDAPs under 10 U.S.C. 4272. The TRA report is incorporated into the ITRA requirement to be conducted on MDAPs for Milestones B and C and full-rate production decisions. For ACAT II programs and below, the TRA report format and submission follow Service/Agency policy. DoD Engineering policy in DoDI 5000.88 requires MDAPs and ACAT I and II programs to employ the DoD Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) Outline and the Defense Technical Risk Assessment Methodology (DTRAM) to incorporate metrics into the SEP and collect objective, quantitative data for TRAs. Table 5-1 of the DoD TRA Guidebook provides guidance for conducting TRAs for the six Adaptive Acquisition Framework (AAF) Pathways. Appendix B of that guidebook contains a suggested TRA outline.

Technology Readiness in the CDD. According to Appendix C, Enclosure B, Paragraph 2.5.11, of the Manual for the Operation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) (JCIDS Manual), 30 Oct 21, Section 11 of the Capability Development Document (CDD) is called Technology Readiness. This section is repeated below and shows the link between the TRA and the CDD.

     2.5.11.1. The purpose of this section is to highlight known technological challenges which may impact the ability to reach the level of performance identified in the performance attributes (KPPs, KSAs, or APAs), or represent risk to delivering capabilities on schedule and within budget. This information from the Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) may be used to inform lifecycle cost, performance, schedule, and quantity tradeoff discussions during review and validation of the CDD.

     2.5.11.1.1. For the CDD generated prior to the Milestone B acquisition decision, this section identifies technological risk areas that require attention during the EMD phase of acquisition.

     2.5.11.1.2. In cases where the CDD describes multiple increments of a capability solution, this section must describe the critical technologies to be matured for each increment. This may also be addressed in the incremental annex as they are developed for a capability solution.

     2.5.11.2. For each Critical Technology Element (CTE) with a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of less than TRL-6, discuss potential workarounds to achieve partial or complete program success in the event that the technology does not mature as anticipated. Additionally, highlight how incremental acquisition strategies and/or MOSA is being used to enable flexibility in critical technology areas. Where known, include decision points and criteria for implementing the potential workaround(s).

     2.5.11.3. Sponsors shall address Exportability “Allied/Partner Interoperability and Coalition Use” as per the Conventional Arms Transfer Policy. Sponsors must consider existing export controls, controlled technical information assessments, and the identification of critical program information when addressing exportability. Coordination with the Defense Technology Security Administration and the sponsor’s associated Military Department Counterintelligence Organization can assist for scoping requirements in the Intelligence Supportability Section.

TRA Conduct. The TRA is funded and reported by the Program Manager (PM) who proposes a team of subject matter experts to assist in conducting the TRA in accordance with the DoD TRA Guidebook. Acquisition Category II-IV programs should conduct TRAs in accordance with relevant Component direction by tailoring the DoD TRA guidance as appropriate. See Section 4 of the DoD TRA Guidebook for guidance on initiating and conducting high-quality TRAs.